"Why doesn't Batman just use his money to fix gotham?"

[lilyrose]

Well, Gotham is a crime-riddled cesspool, but the question is WHY it is this way. Bruce blames the criminals themselves and not the conditions that created the situation. And THAT's what has to be the case for the whole Batman concept to work.

He doesn't think about what kind of power he has as Bruce Wayne and what other people like him have done or not done for Gotham to be this way. Politicians and law enforcement are corrupt, but that corruption in politics comes from nefarious backers, corporations and evil rich elites who own those hand-picked politicians so that they don't work for the people, only the money. And I just think as one of the moneyed elite himself, Bruce has a lot more power than he thinks (esp with his own Batman resources) to take down the evil moneyed class. For example, what would happen if he himself bought out every politician in Gotham? Just as an example for a story, I mean. He definitely has that kind of cash, right?

[SiegePerilous02]

Well, Gotham is a crime-riddled cesspool, but the question is WHY it is this way. Bruce blames the criminals themselves and not the conditions that created the situation. And THAT's what has to be the case for the whole Batman concept to work.

He doesn't think about what kind of power he has as Bruce Wayne and what other people like him have done or not done for Gotham to be this way. Politicians and law enforcement are corrupt, but that corruption in politics comes from nefarious backers, corporations and evil rich elites who own those hand-picked politicians so that they don't work for the people, only the money. And I just think as one of the moneyed elite himself, Bruce has a lot more power than he thinks (esp with his own Batman resources) to take down the evil moneyed class. For example, what would happen if he himself bought out every politician in Gotham? Just as an example for a story, I mean. He definitely has that kind of cash, right?

Not really. Year One for example makes it clear where the corruption really comes from and Batman takes aim at the corrupt politicians, officials and police with Gordon and Dent's help. This was adapted into Batman Begins.

Across 80 years of stories in multiple mediums with multiple authors with differing view points, saying that Batman ONLY blames the criminals themselves and the concept can only work that way is painting with too broad a brush. It's just not true in every case, and may not actually be common at all.

[Gaius]

It would be a rather boring comic to read if it was just Bruce in meetings going over how much in donations he's making to which charities or the meetings he has scheduled with social services programs/organizations

[Mr. White]

Well, Gotham is a crime-riddled cesspool, but the question is WHY it is this way. Bruce blames the criminals themselves and not the conditions that created the situation. And THAT's what has to be the case for the whole Batman concept to work.

He doesn't think about what kind of power he has as Bruce Wayne and what other people like him have done or not done for Gotham to be this way. Politicians and law enforcement are corrupt, but that corruption in politics comes from nefarious backers, corporations and evil rich elites who own those hand-picked politicians so that they don't work for the people, only the money. And I just think as one of the moneyed elite himself, Bruce has a lot more power than he thinks (esp with his own Batman resources) to take down the evil moneyed class. For example, what would happen if he himself bought out every politician in Gotham? Just as an example for a story, I mean. He definitely has that kind of cash, right?

Actually because Gotham is fictional, it isn’t anything except what the writer makes it out to be. Which was the essence of my post.
But yes I agree. Bruce probably has more “power” than Batman himself.

[Mr. White]

It would be a rather boring comic to read if it was just Bruce in meetings going over how donations he's making to which charities or the meetings he has scheduled with social services programs/organizations

Haha. Yeah that does sound boring.
That said Iron Man did have good stories involving corporate espionage, hostile takeovers and general business environment antics work.

[Valentis]

There would not be any story to tell.

[godisawesome]

There would not be any story to tell.

Actually, considering how much time the BatBooks spent with Gotham being portrayed as a prototypical “decent city” before the Bronze Aeg started introducing elements of police corruption and before Miller went whole hog into making Gotham a decaying hell’s ale of a city, I think tha5 may be an inaccurate assessment.

“Decaying Hellscape” Gotham doesn’t cut off the potential for conflict and adventure... it simply opens up the story to *more* conflict and adventure, a bit like How Lex Luthor having LexCorp as his loyal company and accomplices does the same thing in Metropolis for Superman.

Which is why, if a story wanted to have a sense fo progression, you could afford to establish something like Gotham improving the further Batman gets into his career.

Incidentally, this is one of the things that made me go “...I see why this is happening, but I don’t really agree with it’s overall impact” when I read Gotham Central and found just how much Rucka and Brubaker were resurrecting the idea of the GCPD as a criminally corrupt cesspit outside of the MCU.

It kind fo went against the idea of Jim Gordon having cleaned up the Deaprtment when he was Commisioner, or of the GCPD being a clearly more righteous organization even late into Batman's career; it’s hard to see that bar scene from that one issue where every single cop is talking like they’re trying to make Dixon’s Blüdhaven look like an average city squaring with the idea of the Blue Boys sticking by Gordon during No Man's Land.

[SiegePerilous02]

Honestly, later into Batman's career they can get by with keeping Gotham aesthetically spooky/weird but actually has low rates for average street crime and less police corruption because he and his allies are making an actual difference by battling crime on multiple fronts. Weeding out corruption and attacking the roots, as well as inspiring the average populace to not put up with abuse anymore.

The main source of conflict would be the whacky supervillains (which it already kind of is anyway). These garish criminal masterminds with their ludicrous plots and costumes, freeze rays, plant monsters and death traps/hideouts they must flush a **** ton of money down the toilet on don't really have a real world equivalent. You kind of need Batman for that stuff, it's what most of us are actually here for.

[Vakanai]

Just thought how it's kind of interesting how the critical question of Batman has moved from "why doesn't he kill?" to "why doesn't he fix it with money?" Wonder what that says about us as a society...

[godisawesome]

Just thought how it's kind of interesting how the critical question of Batman has moved from "why doesn't he kill?" to "why doesn't he fix it with money?" Wonder what that says about us as a society...

Some of it is a reaction by the world of creative art against the current rise of regressivism, nationalism and fascism around the globe and at home while hoping for a resurgence elf progressivism, but I think some of it probably has a basis in a rise in arguments against Batman killing be raised in the comics community as well.

It’s a lot easier to offer up a blunt observation that the biggest economic reason is no one’s going to want a villain permanently gone. It’s also easier to argue that DC fans have had enough “Batman But He Kills”-type characters around to realize that it doesn’t really enhance enjoyment of the story.

And occasionally, you get eloquent explanations that since a vigilante leaving criminals alive allows the law to have a say, and thus the citizens and people of Gotham, so it helps keep Batman from being an outright fascist character, so that helps.

[Crossfist]

I definitely don't care for any iteration of Batman being a killer.

[AmiMizuno]

He has tried. He puts a lot of money in school and many other things. However, many people don't care. People who enjoy evil don't care how good things go. They just want to do what they want. Plus there is only so much Bruce can do. Villians will still do what they want.

[Vakanai]

Some of it is a reaction by the world of creative art against the current rise of regressivism, nationalism and fascism around the globe and at home while hoping for a resurgence elf progressivism, but I think some of it probably has a basis in a rise in arguments against Batman killing be raised in the comics community as well.

It’s a lot easier to offer up a blunt observation that the biggest economic reason is no one’s going to want a villain permanently gone. It’s also easier to argue that DC fans have had enough “Batman But He Kills”-type characters around to realize that it doesn’t really enhance enjoyment of the story.

And occasionally, you get eloquent explanations that since a vigilante leaving criminals alive allows the law to have a say, and thus the citizens and people of Gotham, so it helps keep Batman from being an outright fascist character, so that helps.

Perhaps, but I was thinking less why that question fell out of favor and more why has this question suddenly seemed to rise in popularity, along with the question of Batman "punching down" against the poor and mentally ill when that's not really true largely.

[josai21]

Personally, the only thing I want is for an author, not a comic book serial writer, but an actual writer along the lines of Neil Gaiman or the like to sit down and right Batman. Give him a definitive beginning, middle, and end. And then...let that be it. Comics are dying anyways. They're used more as experimental grounds for the larger media forms than actual story telling. I'd do this for all the main heroes personally. Give the DC Verse a definitive beginning, middle, and end.

[charliehustle415]

Personally, the only thing I want is for an author, not a comic book serial writer, but an actual writer along the lines of Neil Gaiman or the like to sit down and right Batman. Give him a definitive beginning, middle, and end. And then...let that be it. Comics are dying anyways. They're used more as experimental grounds for the larger media forms than actual story telling. I'd do this for all the main heroes personally. Give the DC Verse a definitive beginning, middle, and end.

Morrison did that as well as Snyder; of course the former is leagues ahead, so I would recommend picking up Morrison's run